HD 2900XTX Benches

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
Someone around here was asking for GPU DIP. Here it is:

http://dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7044&commentid=131638#comments

Anyone want to translate?

it means OH NOES

So the results of that test are bad to say the least?

My guess is it authenticates they have a card and are testing it. Now unless they are flatout telling lies, these benchmarks are probably legit.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
Someone around here was asking for GPU DIP. Here it is:

http://dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7044&commentid=131638#comments

Anyone want to translate?

it means OH NOES

So the results of that test are bad to say the least?

My guess is it authenticates they have a card and are testing it. Now unless they are flatout telling lies, these benchmarks are probably legit.

YES..benches are BS...check this out

Oblivion @ 1280x1024
HD2900XTX: 100 FPS
GTX: 110 FPS
GTS : 39 FPS

There is NO way that these numbers are correct

GTX getting 110FPS in Oblivion and GTS getting 39FPS at 1280x1024 this is BS

According to Anandtech..GTX not getting more tha 64FPS in oblivion @ 1280x1024 and GTS 47FPS More BS as usual

If Kevin is making these numbers up he should be sued by AMD. Spreading FUD is getting stupid.

If someone makes a comment to my post then before you reply answer the following benchmarks. Do not bother posting if you have no answer.

 

[aka1nas]

Could the GTS they tested be a 320MB part and they had AA cranked up?

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Let's try and put a positive spin on all this gloom:

Nvidia has succeeded in the $300+ market (8800GTS 320 thru 8800GTX) and really fcked up on mainstream mid-range.
There is still hope that AMD might put out something great in the mainstream mid-range & value markets.

People always say the real money lies in the high-volume mid-range parts so let's relax, wait for the final word from Xbit/FiringSquad/Rage3d/Anandtech etc. and the launch of the whole lineup before writing AMD's epitaph.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel
Let's try and put a positive spin on all this gloom:

Nvidia has succeeded in the $300+ market (8800GTS 320 thru 8800GTX) and really fcked up on mainstream mid-range.
There is still hope that AMD might put out something great in the mainstream mid-range & value markets.

People always say the real money lies in the high-volume mid-range parts so let's relax, wait for the final word from Xbit/FiringSquad/Rage3d/Anandtech etc. and the launch of the whole lineup before writing AMD's epitaph.

Why not answer my question?

 

[Nightmare225]

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel
Let's try and put a positive spin on all this gloom:

Nvidia has succeeded in the $300+ market (8800GTS 320 thru 8800GTX) and really fcked up on mainstream mid-range.
There is still hope that AMD might put out something great in the mainstream mid-range & value markets.

People always say the real money lies in the high-volume mid-range parts so let's relax, wait for the final word from Xbit/FiringSquad/Rage3d/Anandtech etc. and the launch of the whole lineup before writing AMD's epitaph.

Why not answer my question?

Because this is a forum and he doesn't have to do what you wish?
Be careful, your ATI diehardness is showing...

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: Nightmare225

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel
Let's try and put a positive spin on all this gloom:

Nvidia has succeeded in the $300+ market (8800GTS 320 thru 8800GTX) and really fcked up on mainstream mid-range.
There is still hope that AMD might put out something great in the mainstream mid-range & value markets.

People always say the real money lies in the high-volume mid-range parts so let's relax, wait for the final word from Xbit/FiringSquad/Rage3d/Anandtech etc. and the launch of the whole lineup before writing AMD's epitaph.

Why not answer my question?

Because this is a forum and he doesn't have to do what you wish?
Be careful, your ATI diehardness is showing...

Considering that either Anandtech is lying or Kevin is and it is not hard to decide. He does not have to answer, anything other then answering the hypocrisy that is showing is irrelevant.

 

[theprodigalrebel]

I just posted a general comment in this thread of doom. Wasn't meant to address any particular post. I'll save final judgment when I see it on major websites that run 25-page articles. Until then, all the debunking gives me a serious headache - trying to figure out what sources to trust and what not.

The outlook doesn't look good from where we stand now - I do take the DT benches with a fistful of salt but I don't expect the final verdict to do a full 180.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: Nightmare225

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: theprodigalrebel
Let's try and put a positive spin on all this gloom:

Nvidia has succeeded in the $300+ market (8800GTS 320 thru 8800GTX) and really fcked up on mainstream mid-range.
There is still hope that AMD might put out something great in the mainstream mid-range & value markets.

People always say the real money lies in the high-volume mid-range parts so let's relax, wait for the final word from Xbit/FiringSquad/Rage3d/Anandtech etc. and the launch of the whole lineup before writing AMD's epitaph.

Why not answer my question?

Because this is a forum and he doesn't have to do what you wish?
Be careful, your ATI diehardness is showing...

Considering that either Anandtech is lying or Kevin is and it is not hard to decide. He does not have to answer, anything other then answering the hypocrisy that is showing is irrelevant.

At least it seems the launch was moved to 2nd may, so we will soon know if this is all BS or legit (which is very very very unlikely, and I refuse to believe Ati wasted millions in R&D for a card that manages to be 5% faster than the previous gen)

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
Someone around here was asking for GPU DIP. Here it is:

http://dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7044&commentid=131638#comments

Anyone want to translate?

it means OH NOES

So the results of that test are bad to say the least?

My guess is it authenticates they have a card and are testing it. Now unless they are flatout telling lies, these benchmarks are probably legit.

YES..benches are BS...check this out

Oblivion @ 1280x1024
HD2900XTX: 100 FPS
GTX: 110 FPS
GTS : 39 FPS

There is NO way that these numbers are correct

GTX getting 110FPS in Oblivion and GTS getting 39FPS at 1280x1024 this is BS

According to Anandtech..GTX not getting more tha 64FPS in oblivion @ 1280x1024 and GTS 47FPS More BS as usual

If Kevin is making these numbers up he should be sued by AMD. Spreading FUD is getting stupid.

If someone makes a comment to my post then before you reply answer the following benchmarks. Do not bother posting if you have no answer.

Your comparison between AT and DT benchmarks is completely irrelevant. The hardware used in the systems was very, very different not to mention different drives were used and there were almost definitely other differences in the software configurations. To say that "there is NO way" DT's benchmarks are correct simply because AT shows 64FPS in one test and DT shows 110FPS in a similar but VERY DIFFERENT test is horrible logic and borderline FUD of your own. If (when) these benchmarks are confirmed by other sites, I truly hope you'll be the first to post an apology to those at DT.

 

[Dainas]

Originally posted by: josh6079
God, 2007 has really sucked for us gamers so far.

No, it only really sucked for those dead set on getting an ATI top-end card. Cept for some driver problems, us 8800GTX owners have been basking in the sun since late november.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: Dainas

Originally posted by: josh6079
God, 2007 has really sucked for us gamers so far.

No, it only really sucked for those dead set on getting an ATI top-end card. Cept for some driver problems, us 8800GTX owners have been basking in the sun since late november.

We've had like 2 good games come out so far in 2007. Won't be great until World In Conflict, Crysis, and Bioshock. That's when 2007 gets good

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
At least it seems the launch was moved to 2nd may, so we will soon know if this is all BS or legit (which is very very very unlikely, and I refuse to believe Ati wasted millions in R&D for a card that manages to be 5% faster than the previous gen)

It happens man. You think Nvidia planned on spending the R&D money on NV30 just so it could be the biggest flop in GPU history?

I'm not saying the benches are totally legit, but Kristopher Kubicki has to have the biggest balls on this Earth to put the reputation of his own website on the line like this when he is flat out lying. Not to mention the nerve to come and post on this forum if he's lying.

Just keep that in mind.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Dainas

Originally posted by: josh6079
God, 2007 has really sucked for us gamers so far.

No, it only really sucked for those dead set on getting an ATI top-end card. Cept for some driver problems, us 8800GTX owners have been basking in the sun since late november.

I think what he meant was no competition = higher prices. nVidia is capitalizing on ATi/AMD's delay by charging more for their GPU's. So $600 graphics cards are ridiculous, but people who want DX10 have to at this point. nVidia crushes the consumers balls while AMD sits and watches. Great combo!

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
Someone around here was asking for GPU DIP. Here it is:

http://dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7044&commentid=131638#comments

Anyone want to translate?

it means OH NOES

So the results of that test are bad to say the least?

My guess is it authenticates they have a card and are testing it. Now unless they are flatout telling lies, these benchmarks are probably legit.

YES..benches are BS...check this out

Oblivion @ 1280x1024
HD2900XTX: 100 FPS
GTX: 110 FPS
GTS : 39 FPS

There is NO way that these numbers are correct

GTX getting 110FPS in Oblivion and GTS getting 39FPS at 1280x1024 this is BS

According to Anandtech..GTX not getting more tha 64FPS in oblivion @ 1280x1024 and GTS 47FPS More BS as usual

If Kevin is making these numbers up he should be sued by AMD. Spreading FUD is getting stupid.

If someone makes a comment to my post then before you reply answer the following benchmarks. Do not bother posting if you have no answer.

Your comparison between AT and DT benchmarks is completely irrelevant. The hardware used in the systems was very, very different not to mention different drives were used and there were almost definitely other differences in the software configurations. To say that "there is NO way" DT's benchmarks are correct simply because AT shows 64FPS in one test and DT shows 110FPS in a similar but VERY DIFFERENT test is horrible logic and borderline FUD of your own. If (when) these benchmarks are confirmed by other sites, I truly hope you'll be the first to post an apology to those at DT.

The hardware used? Did you not even see Anandtech's review? Different drives used?

No drivers would show this increase, no amount of different test show this difference. Did you even notice the GTS scores? I bet not because you have no idea what you are talking about. Do not give me this BS in software configurations either.

You need to re-examine yourself and come up with better arguments. The difference are so large that no amount of test bed setups will vary this much.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Zstream
The hardware used? Did you not even see Anandtech's review? Different drives used?

No drivers would show this increase, no amount of different test show this difference. Did you even notice the GTS scores? I bet not because you have no idea what you are talking about. Do not give me this BS in software configurations either.

You need to re-examine yourself and come up with better arguments. The difference are so large that no amount of test bed setups will vary this much.

Until you can prove to me that Anandtech and Dailytech used the exact same timedemo, your argument holds no weight.

The disparity between AT and DT benches can easily be explained if the two benched the cards in different areas of the games. AT may have benched in outdoors and DT may have benched indoors. Different areas of the game will render different FPS results.

If you can't prove that both sets of benches were calculated in the same areas of the game, then you are comparing apples to oranges and that is not how things are done.

 

[Zstream]

Then tell me how the GTS scores remain identical to what everyone benches but the GTX is far far far far from anything we have seen so far.

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: Zstream
Then tell me how the GTS scores remain identical to what everyone benches but the GTX is far far far far from anything we have seen so far.

gts scores were the day before in the hand of one tester (in an amd controlled test with the xt), gtx score was in the hands of another (with the xtx in hand).

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Zstream
Then tell me how the GTS scores remain identical to what everyone benches but the GTX is far far far far from anything we have seen so far.

I dont know. Only Dailytech knows. That's the point that you're missing.

Because we must use FRAPS to benchmark this game while running though a forest, we can see much larger variations in framerate between test runs than in other games.

That's from the Anandtech article. FRAPS is probably the most unreliable way to bench cards because it's totally dependent on where the player is and how long the FPS are recorded.

Dailytech already stated that they had very limited time to bench the cards, so I find it very hard to believe that they had time to call up Anand and say, "Hey Anand, we're running some benches and would like to know exactly where in the game you recorded the FPS for the 8800GTX roundup in Oblivion."

Since there obviously is no reliable way to bench cards in Oblivion, I'm guessing that there is some kind of loose "standard" that reviewers use.

The question you should be asking is not why DT's benches are so different, but if all 4 cards DT used were benched in the same area of the game. As long as the cards were benched in the same areas with the same settings, then the results are trustworthy.

 

[Nightmare225]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: Zstream
Then tell me how the GTS scores remain identical to what everyone benches but the GTX is far far far far from anything we have seen so far.

I dont know. Only Dailytech knows. That's the point that you're missing.

Because we must use FRAPS to benchmark this game while running though a forest, we can see much larger variations in framerate between test runs than in other games.

That's from the Anandtech article. FRAPS is probably the most unreliable way to bench cards because it's totally dependent on where the player is and how long the FPS are recorded.

Dailytech already stated that they had very limited time to bench the cards, so I find it very hard to believe that they had time to call up Anand and say, "Hey Anand, we're running some benches and would like to know exactly where in the game you recorded the FPS for the 8800GTX roundup in Oblivion."

Since there obviously is no reliable way to bench cards in Oblivion, I'm guessing that there is some kind of loose "standard" that reviewers use.

The question you should be asking is not why DT's benches are so different, but if all 4 cards DT used were benched in the same area of the game. As long as the cards were benched in the same areas with the same settings, then the results are trustworthy.

Well-said. :thumbsup:

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: AnotherGuy

Originally posted by: apoppin

i know ... you hate to hear it
... try to justify it is "good value" ... the nvidia boys bought the DustBuster ... just like the fans will buy r600 and console themselves with "features" they don't really like.

My first post on this thread was 'what a dissapointment...' so no u got the wrong guy for fanboy...
I will say it thoe that i prefer ATI in general better than NV only for the fact that ati has been doing a better job with their cards... when it came down to eye candy and higher resolutions... thats for the last 2 generations at least... while nV had the raw speed mostly...
Also I liked ATI bacause of the types of the games i play mostly... which is dx vs opengl that nv favors... but if nV got it right this round and scales better in both higher res and in general then ill go with nvidia... I dont have stocks with amd so i dont care that much.

i did NOT say *you* are a fanboy

i started out with a statement directed to you "you hate to hear it"
[which IS true ... imo ... an 'observation']
THEN it goes into a GENERAL statement "just LIKE the fans who will"

i am sorry i was not clearer but i decided to cut and run for work
=====================================

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The 8800GTX can beat a 1950XTX crossfire setup.

Maybe the GTX was just a swift kick to the nuts that no one saw coming.

I think ATI was just side swiped by the GTX release, getting bought out by AMD and the royal pain-in-the-ass it is creating drivers for Vista.

They were probably all set to go, on schedule. Then the above "perfect storm" hit and they had to race back to the drawing board.

Not to mention that the Core 2 Duo was a swift kick to AMD's big green sack. So their focus is split right now.

This year is pretty much going to suck for AMD. Next year? Who knows. The tech industry moves so fast that they could be right back on top again with-in another generation or so.

this is what i HAVE been saying

i find it very *strange* that we agree ... after years of complete and utter disagreement


i think you changed


anyway ....

i have been saying that r600 is a GREAT video card and a natural "evolution" for a DX10 card ... probably very good with DX10 games

HOWEVER, g80 is mindboggyling better ... *exactly* as 9700p was to the Ultra DustBuster

an generational LEAP ... and kudos to nvidia

HOWEVER, it was horrible *timing* for AMD ...
... i think ATi would just have called it a day and released r600 back in December and it would be only slightly slower than now - without the bells and whistles

Big Deal ... they would catch-up this Fall


OntheOTHERhand ... AMD was caught in "shock and awe" and they HAD to respond with something "better" then the GTX ... 13 respins later and we have the SAME r600 but decked out with nice features and the whole family along for a hard launch

will it be a disaster?

i say 'depends' ... but it doesn't look good based on what we see - right now ... and what we waited for ... since January

stay tuned

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: Zstream

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: swtethan

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki
Someone around here was asking for GPU DIP. Here it is:

http://dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=7044&commentid=131638#comments

Anyone want to translate?

it means OH NOES

So the results of that test are bad to say the least?

My guess is it authenticates they have a card and are testing it. Now unless they are flatout telling lies, these benchmarks are probably legit.

YES..benches are BS...check this out

Oblivion @ 1280x1024
HD2900XTX: 100 FPS
GTX: 110 FPS
GTS : 39 FPS

There is NO way that these numbers are correct

GTX getting 110FPS in Oblivion and GTS getting 39FPS at 1280x1024 this is BS

According to Anandtech..GTX not getting more tha 64FPS in oblivion @ 1280x1024 and GTS 47FPS More BS as usual

If Kevin is making these numbers up he should be sued by AMD. Spreading FUD is getting stupid.

If someone makes a comment to my post then before you reply answer the following benchmarks. Do not bother posting if you have no answer.

Your comparison between AT and DT benchmarks is completely irrelevant. The hardware used in the systems was very, very different not to mention different drives were used and there were almost definitely other differences in the software configurations. To say that "there is NO way" DT's benchmarks are correct simply because AT shows 64FPS in one test and DT shows 110FPS in a similar but VERY DIFFERENT test is horrible logic and borderline FUD of your own. If (when) these benchmarks are confirmed by other sites, I truly hope you'll be the first to post an apology to those at DT.

The hardware used? Did you not even see Anandtech's review? Different drives used?

No drivers would show this increase, no amount of different test show this difference. Did you even notice the GTS scores? I bet not because you have no idea what you are talking about. Do not give me this BS in software configurations either.

You need to re-examine yourself and come up with better arguments. The difference are so large that no amount of test bed setups will vary this much.

Obviously when I said different drives I meant different drivers. Anyway, you are either a completely blind AMD/ATI fanboy, or you are just plain ignorant. Either way, you have a serious attitude problem and need to stop the personal attacks.

I have read both articles closely and, despite what you say, there are plenty of scenarios that could result in very different benchmark scores, most of which have already been pointed out in the posts above mine, but if you must have a list:
[*]Different hardware configurations
[*]Different drivers and driver settings
[*]Different idiosyncrasies in OS install
[*]Different versions of the games being benchmarked
[*]Different benchmark methodologies (FRAPS, timedemos, etc...)
[*]Different levels/areas being benchmarked within the games

I suppose you are trying to tell me that if my buddy and I both have 8800GTXs and both play Oblivion, then I take average FPS with fraps while I'm randomly running around a cave for 30 seconds, then go to his machine and take average FPS using RivaTuner while I'm randomly running around outside an oblivion gate in a grass-covered field next to a lake at sunset for 30 seconds the numbers should be identical. Is that what you're claiming?

 

[KristopherKubicki]

gts scores were the day before in the hand of one tester (in an amd controlled test with the xt), gtx score was in the hands of another (with the xtx in hand).

The first tests, in the article done by Anh, were using one HD 2900 XT and a 8800 GTS. The second article, done by Sven, was using a different HD 2900 XT, a HD 2900 XTX and an 8800 GTS. I told them to use similar test hardware (it's as close as they could get), but each did their own Oblivion benchmarks as well since there's not a real benchmark for it.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: KristopherKubicki

gts scores were the day before in the hand of one tester (in an amd controlled test with the xt), gtx score was in the hands of another (with the xtx in hand).

The first tests, in the article done by Anh, were using one HD 2900 XT and a 8800 GTS. The second article, done by Sven, was using a different HD 2900 XT, a HD 2900 XTX and an 8800 GTS. I told them to use similar test hardware (it's as close as they could get), but each did their own Oblivion benchmarks as well since there's not a real benchmark for it.

Which proves mine and SexyK's points.

 

[apoppin]

i lost count ... who is on who's side and what is the point


and i am *curious* what are the OTHER tech forums saying ... nvidia's, Rage, AMD's, B3D, HardOCP ... etc.

how are they taking the news?
:Q